With a new pre-release iPad now out in the wild ahead of Friday's launch, benchmark tests conducted with the device have confirmed it has 1 gigabyte of RAM and an ARM CPU clocked at 1 gigahertz.

Vietnamese-language site Tinh.te ran a Geekbench test with the new iPad it obtained this week. The "System Information" details displayed show an "iPad3,3" model running iOS 5.1.

The new iPad's custom A5X processor has an ARMv7 processor clocked at 1GHz, which is identical to the A5 CPU found in the iPad 2. While the dual-core CPU remains the same, the system-on-a-chip also includes a quad-core graphics processor that Apple has said blows away its predecessor.

The hands-on test also shows a total of 988 megabytes of RAM in the new iPad, confirming earlier reports that claimed the amount of RAM in the A5X had been doubled to 1 gigabyte. Both the iPad 2 and iPhone 4S feature 512MB of RAM.

The third-generation iPad earned an overall Geekbench score of 756. Its strongest performance came in the "Floating Point" test, where the score was 915, followed by the "Memory" test, at 815.

The tests were conducted on the latest available release of Geekbench for iOS, version 2.2.7. For comparison, a Wi-Fi 16GB iPad 2 running iOS 5.1 earns a similar score of 760. That's because the software tests the CPU, which is identical to the new iPad. The Geekbench test does not represent the new graphics processing in the A5X, but it does confirm the clock speed and RAM.

The hands-on tests are legitimate, as the same poster on the Vietnamese site also uploaded a video showing an unboxing and hands-on with the new iPad. The tests were conducted with a pre-release 16GB LTE-capable iPad.

Honestly I'm more concerned about the speed of the postal service than I am about the speed of the iPad. I just got my shipment notification email from apple.

Really though I have owned both of the previous iPads and never have I sat there and wondered when my iPad would finally catch up to me. My experience has been 100% that's why I can buy 2 new ones with confidence that I won't be disappointed.

That is what I am looking forward to... I think everyone is going to be pleasantly surprised when we see what this GPU can really do! What blows my mind is 70% more battery for just the screen to stay at 10 hours? I think some of that has to do with a ridiculous GPU... hoping it does anyways!

It'll be interesting to see how the same game with the same graphics performs compared to the ipad1 and ipad2. i.e. I wonder if the graphics performance will even be as good as an ipad2 given that it has to draw four times the pixels. Testing a game on a 2.97ghz i7 intel core iMac in the iPad retina simulator isn't good (much lower fps than in the iPad simulator).

It'll be interesting to see how the same game with the same graphics performs compared to the ipad1 and ipad2. i.e. I wonder if the graphics performance will even be as good as an ipad2 given that it has to draw four times the pixels.

I don't see how there is any chance that 1024x768 vs 2048x1536 polygon rendering being the same. I suspect it will be half the speed or less than the ipad 2 when rendering the same number of polygons on the higher resolution with everything else being equal. Graphics acceleration is double from ipad 2, CPU is the same, and we have 4 times the amount of pixels. You probably wont see the difference in games tweaked for the ipad 3 retina display though. The developers will end up reducing polygon counts but increase graphics effects to try and make up for the reduced polygon count at the higher resolution. Either that or they will keep the ipad 2 resolution and add better effects.

I do hope I am wrong though. I am certainly disappointed at the same CPU speed and CPU core count being the same. I was hoping we would be able to keep the polygon counts at least the same at the higher resolution. It would be a nice surprise to find out that they increase CPU speed when under high graphics loads but that is just wishful thinking I am sure.

In the end developers will tweak it to perform well (reducing or increasing graphics effects or polygon counts) so I am not really that worried about the final games but just feel disappointed.

I don't see how there is any chance that 1024x768 vs 2048x1536 polygon rendering being the same. I suspect it will be half the speed or less than the ipad 2 when rendering the same number of polygons on the higher resolution with everything else being equal. Graphics acceleration is double from ipad 2, CPU is the same, and we have 4 times the amount of pixels. You probably wont see the difference in games tweaked for the ipad 3 retina display though. The developers will end up reducing polygon counts but increase graphics effects to try and make up for the reduced polygon count at the higher resolution. Either that or they will keep the ipad 2 resolution and add better effects.

If the app is run at 1024 x 768, performance should be the same or faster. If it's run at 2048 x 1536, I agree that it could run slower, but it's a little hard to say for sure because it depends a lot on what the app is displaying.

Definitely no iPad 2 owner should upgrade for speed. It's all about the display.

I don't see how there is any chance that 1024x768 vs 2048x1536 polygon rendering being the same. I suspect it will be half the speed or less than the ipad 2 when rendering the same number of polygons on the higher resolution with everything else being equal. Graphics acceleration is double from ipad 2, CPU is the same, and we have 4 times the amount of pixels. You probably wont see the difference in games tweaked for the ipad 3 retina display though. The developers will end up reducing polygon counts but increase graphics effects to try and make up for the reduced polygon count at the higher resolution. Either that or they will keep the ipad 2 resolution and add better effects.

I do hope I am wrong though. I am certainly disappointed at the same CPU speed and CPU core count being the same. I was hoping we would be able to keep the polygon counts at least the same at the higher resolution. It would be a nice surprise to find out that they increase CPU speed when under high graphics loads but that is just wishful thinking I am sure.

In the end developers will tweak it to perform well (reducing or increasing graphics effects or polygon counts) so I am not really that worried about the final games but just feel disappointed.

I think that you'll be surprised when the full benchmarks are released, as well as new software titles taking advantage of the new power structure. As you know with Apple, its never been about specs. There's a lot going on under the hood that is not realized, and directly translates into an improved customer experience. As Ive said, Apple won't bother releasing something that is not 'genuinely better', than what is out today. We'll see on Friday...

Does anyone know when the embargo is up on reviews? Is it tomorrow or thursday?

No need to wait. The reviews will be "disappointed" as usual. All Apple products are disappointing don't you know. Tech reviews are all about spec orgasms. Ever notice the forum signatures of the nerd herd? They all contain CPU model numbers, clock speed, GPU RAM, bus speeds, and on and on. Specs are where it's at man!

The new iPad is all about that glorious display that consumes ... battery life.

Apple have increased battery capacity by 70% to get the same impressive runtime, and only a small weight and width penalty. They needed to increase graphics performance given the hi-res display. That along with more Ram probably means there wasn't the juice to up processor speed. We'll have to await more efficient CPUs or further improved batteries to get a general performance lift.

I don't see how there is any chance that 1024x768 vs 2048x1536 polygon rendering being the same. I suspect it will be half the speed or less than the ipad 2 when rendering the same number of polygons on the higher resolution with everything else being equal. Graphics acceleration is double from ipad 2, CPU is the same, and we have 4 times the amount of pixels. You probably wont see the difference in games tweaked for the ipad 3 retina display though. The developers will end up reducing polygon counts but increase graphics effects to try and make up for the reduced polygon count at the higher resolution. Either that or they will keep the ipad 2 resolution and add better effects.

I do hope I am wrong though. I am certainly disappointed at the same CPU speed and CPU core count being the same. I was hoping we would be able to keep the polygon counts at least the same at the higher resolution. It would be a nice surprise to find out that they increase CPU speed when under high graphics loads but that is just wishful thinking I am sure.

In the end developers will tweak it to perform well (reducing or increasing graphics effects or polygon counts) so I am not really that worried about the final games but just feel disappointed.

I don't think you should base your assumptions off of these specs or start making ridiculous claims on the performance. Did you see the video of Epic Game's Infinity Blade: Dungeons or Namco's Sky Gamblers: Air Supremacy.... which are both running at the full 2054x1536 resolution.... and think to yourself "the quality/performance of games is going to suffer"? The frame rates were fluid, the textures were great, and there were all sorts of graphic effects being used.

I don't see how there is any chance that 1024x768 vs 2048x1536 polygon rendering being the same. I suspect it will be half the speed or less than the ipad 2 when rendering the same number of polygons on the higher resolution with everything else being equal. Graphics acceleration is double from ipad 2, CPU is the same, and we have 4 times the amount of pixels. You probably wont see the difference in games tweaked for the ipad 3 retina display though. The developers will end up reducing polygon counts but increase graphics effects to try and make up for the reduced polygon count at the higher resolution. Either that or they will keep the ipad 2 resolution and add better effects.

I do hope I am wrong though. I am certainly disappointed at the same CPU speed and CPU core count being the same. I was hoping we would be able to keep the polygon counts at least the same at the higher resolution. It would be a nice surprise to find out that they increase CPU speed when under high graphics loads but that is just wishful thinking I am sure.

In the end developers will tweak it to perform well (reducing or increasing graphics effects or polygon counts) so I am not really that worried about the final games but just feel disappointed.

Wow, it's amazing how you can already declare it a dud without even ever using it. Anyway, assuming those OpenGL benchmarks are real for the new iPad it shows nearly double frame rates for a lot of things (with some slightly degraded, others slightly faster and some more than double as fast), more than double the fill rate, etc over the iPad 2. Methinks you don't know what you're talking about. But again, we'll all just need to wait for when we know for sure people have the models and get tests before making such broad brush proclamations about how performance is going to suck.

I don't think you should base your assumptions off of these specs or start making ridiculous claims on the performance. Did you see the video of Epic Game's Infinity Blade: Dungeons or Namco's Sky Gamblers: Air Supremacy.... which are both running at the full 2054x1536 resolution.... and think to yourself "the quality/performance of games is going to suffer"? The frame rates were fluid, the textures were great, and there were all sorts of graphic effects being used.

That's the point that all the 'uber game players' miss. Yes, some people might want to play games with 500 fps on WorldofDoomEmpiresWarcraftDiablo type games, but that's not the only type of game out there.

Wii demonstrated that. In spite of its mediocre performance (by the above standards), it became a runaway hit. Similarly, iOS has developed into a top gaming platform, in spite of not having state of the art frame rates. The new iPad will be even better.

Sometimes, it's about the game play, not about fps or megatexels.

"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"Gatorguy 5/31/13

After the investment they made with LG for the iPad's Retina Display that seems unlikely to me. Plus, I've seen nothing on the market that shows IGZO as a suitable replacement for thin-film transistors.

Quote:

Originally Posted by MacInsider2

one year old CPU! Wow, just wow. Guess that balances out the higher screen cost.

Not even close.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alonso Perez

If the app is run at 1024 x 768, performance should be the same or faster. If it's run at 2048 x 1536, I agree that it could run slower, but it's a little hard to say for sure because it depends a lot on what the app is displaying.

Definitely no iPad 2 owner should upgrade for speed. It's all about the display.

I think there would be a slight lose because it needs to send 4x as many singles even if it's still representing the same 1024x768 points.

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Wow, it's amazing how you can already declare it a dud without even ever using it. Anyway, assuming those OpenGL benchmarks are real for the new iPad it shows nearly double frame rates for a lot of things (with some slightly degraded, others slightly faster and some more than double as fast), more than double the fill rate, etc over the iPad 2. Methinks you don't know what you're talking about. But again, we'll all just need to wait for when we know for sure people have the models and get tests before making such broad brush proclamations about how performance is going to suck.

I do not think he is condemning it as a dud, but that if the performance is not exceedingly better than the iPad 2 it will be considered a dud. The problem though is that to get four times the screen rez and up the graphics processor four times, the performance should be the same which is a win in my book (you get all that screen goodness with no hit in performance) but many tech sites will not see it that way and many people wont see it that way.

It is impressive but all the numbers are maximum of 2 x improvement as expected by the doubling of the graphics cores.

I am still excited about it. For 3D games that stay at the ipad 2 resolution and use the greater performance of the ipad 3 they will be able to get almost double the frame rates or put even more on the screen. For graphics apps like drawing programs they could use the full res without issues I am sure.

The main problem with people's thinking is that you don't need to make the new iPad GPU 4x as powerful just to get the same performance as the iPad 2. The only thing changing for games is the higher resolution, that comes down to having a high pixel fillrate. The higher it is the better it performs at increased resolutions. If you look up benchmarks such as this:

You'll see that even the GPU in the iPad 2 has a MUCH higher fillrate than the Tegra chipset. That allows you to push a higher resolution with a lower performance hit. I suspect the games will run the SAME on the new iPad as on the iPad 2 with zero hit in performance thanks to doubling the cores.

one year old CPU! Wow, just wow. Guess that balances out the higher screen cost.

This is partially just another showing of the entitlement society we now seem to have, but do you have any idea how much work goes into creating and getting a new processor into volume manufacture? Why do we all expect a company that is not a dedicated chip company to come up with a completely new CPU every year?

Heck, even Intel who's sole purpose is to make processors only comes out with a totally new core every few years.

You'll see that even the GPU in the iPad 2 has a MUCH higher fillrate than the Tegra chipset. That allows you to push a higher resolution with a lower performance hit. I suspect the games will run the SAME on the new iPad as on the iPad 2 with zero hit in performance thanks to doubling the cores.

It depends. Fillrate isn't everything. Higher resolution texture maps, for example, mean more memory sloshing back and forth. There are various other implications. Note that they kicked up the RAM to 1GB.

But I agree that in general, performance hits will be nil or slight. It's simply that people should understand that they won't see much gain either, as it's all being sunk into the screen. I think that's perfectly reasonable, but worth being aware of.

I'm surprised that the CPU was not clocked a bit higher.
At the end of the day it's about user experience. For that the iPad is untouchable.

Seriously considered upgrading from my iPad 2 but will now wait for the fourth generation which hopefully be slimmer and new design.

Don't get me wrong I think the 3 is fantastic and the screen so alluring.

Now that the iPad has a real auto-focus camera I wouldn't count on it getting much thinner ever. What would you want in a new design? Racing stripes? The form factor is pretty much perfect already.

Personally still holding out for a portable internet device from Apple that's bigger than a phone, but still pocketable.

I got to hold and briefly play with a Samsung Galaxy Note today and, while I agree it's really big for a mobile phone, most of the time smart phones aren't used as phones anyway. For apps, messaging, web browsing, etc. the big screen is a major advantage.

I won't be buying a Galaxy Note though primarily because I do not want Google tracking everything I do and everywhere I go. It's also frustrating that you can't get the current version of Android even when you buy a brand new phone and annoying that you may never be able to get a software upgrade without rooting the phone and installing new firmware from a third party. From that perspective Android feels more like hackintosh than a serious platform.

That's the point that all the 'uber game players' miss. Yes, some people might want to play games with 500 fps on WorldofDoomEmpiresWarcraftDiablo type games, but that's not the only type of game out there.

Wii demonstrated that. In spite of its mediocre performance (by the above standards), it became a runaway hit. Similarly, iOS has developed into a top gaming platform, in spite of not having state of the art frame rates. The new iPad will be even better.

Sometimes, it's about the game play, not about fps or megatexels.

Actually that's not quite true. a 3D game on the ipad better hit 60fps, or you'll notice. It'll look like crap if it doesn't.

That's the point that all the 'uber game players' miss. Yes, some people might want to play games with 500 fps on WorldofDoomEmpiresWarcraftDiablo type games, but that's not the only type of game out there.

Wii demonstrated that. In spite of its mediocre performance (by the above standards), it became a runaway hit. Similarly, iOS has developed into a top gaming platform, in spite of not having state of the art frame rates. The new iPad will be even better.

Sometimes, it's about the game play, not about fps or megatexels.

The Wii has sub standard graphics and a so-so games library. Yes it sold a ton at first but most people don't buy any software for it except the blockbuster titles and have moved on to XBox 360 or PS3.

Amen brother, give me that screen on a 11" MacBook Air and I will be in hog heaven. The best screen available for laptops still goes to Sony however for putting a 1080p rez on a 13". That's what I want so badly on my MacBook Air it hurts, I don't want to buy a huge 17" MacBook Pro, sorry I want small. I also want Asus's 600 nit brightness for the MacBook Air, come on Apple stop putting all your good tech into a tablet. Booo!

When I looked up "Ninjas" in Thesaurus.com, it said "Ninja's can't be found" Well played Ninjas, well played.

Now that the iPad has a real auto-focus camera I wouldn't count on it getting much thinner ever. What would you want in a new design? Racing stripes? The form factor is pretty much perfect already.

Personally still holding out for a portable internet device from Apple that's bigger than a phone, but still pocketable.

I got to hold and briefly play with a Samsung Galaxy Note today and, while I agree it's really big for a mobile phone, most of the time smart phones aren't used as phones anyway. For apps, messaging, web browsing, etc. the big screen is a major advantage.

I won't be buying a Galaxy Note though primarily because I do not want Google tracking everything I do and everywhere I go. It's also frustrating that you can't get the current version of Android even when you buy a brand new phone and annoying that you may never be able to get a software upgrade without rooting the phone and installing new firmware from a third party. From that perspective Android feels more like hackintosh than a serious platform.

Well that's your opinion I happen to really like my Note. It makes a great business phone and ICS is coming in two weeks for the Note. If Android feels like a hacked together system there is nothing I can say or do to change your mind. People like you already have this negative feeling for device that aren't Apple but you really need to own the Note for a few days. I have no doubt that you would fall in love with it as well, it really is a wonderful phone. Weren't you at least impressed with the 285 dpi 1280 x 800 screen or the camera or even the pen. The pen isn't gimmicky either I use the pen so much I got rid of my traditional pen and pad, it just works. This is a company phone so we all have one and I can't tell you how many docs I've received where I just simply make notes with the pen and send back to the sender. I fill out PDF forms now with the pen and then attach it to a mail.

Things that are great about the Note;

The resolution, 1280 x 800 285 dpi
The Screen size, 5.3 now this might be negative for some of you but it really does make sense after using it for a while
The pen, really cool
The speed, very, very quick
The Calendar program puts everything else to shame, just fantastic, Apple listen up here
Multimedia is awesome on it, you can actually enjoy watching a movie on a phone
Games run great, I play Shadow Gun, GTA 3, Modern Combat 3, Dead Space, Nova 2, Need for Speed Hot Pursuit and Shift and all run at 1280 x 800 at 60 FPS +
There isn't one app that I'm missing that I had on my iPhone, I have them all

I can go on and on the fact is the Note is god amongst business phones. The AT&T version however sucks but they do that to all of their phones. If you want a Note buy the international version and you wont be disatisfied.

When I looked up "Ninjas" in Thesaurus.com, it said "Ninja's can't be found" Well played Ninjas, well played.